Baltic Sea Icebreaking Report 2005-2006
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
BALTIC ICEBREAKING MANAGEMENT Baltic Sea Icebreaking Report 2005-2006 1 Table of contents Foreword................................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction............................................................................................................................... 4 Overview of the icebreaking season (2005-2006) and its effect on the maritime transport system in the Baltic Sea region................................................................................................. 5 Costs of icebreaking services in the Baltic Sea ...................................................................... 13 Winter navigation in the different parts of the Baltic Sea ...................................................... 14 Bay of Bothnia .................................................................................................................... 14 Bay of Bothnia .................................................................................................................... 14 Sea of Bothnia..................................................................................................................... 15 Gulf of Finland.................................................................................................................... 15 Gulf of Riga ........................................................................................................................ 18 Central Baltic ...................................................................................................................... 19 South Baltic Coastline......................................................................................................... 19 Description of organisations and icebreakers engaged during the season 2005/2006............ 21 Sweden................................................................................................................................ 21 Finland ................................................................................................................................ 22 Russia.................................................................................................................................. 23 Estonia................................................................................................................................. 24 Latvia .................................................................................................................................. 25 Lithuania ............................................................................................................................. 26 Poland ................................................................................................................................. 26 Germany.............................................................................................................................. 27 Denmark.............................................................................................................................. 27 Progress report of BIM (Baltic Sea Icebreaking Management).............................................. 29 2 Foreword Efficient navigation in the Baltic Sea all year round is an important factor for the functioning of the European transport system and is thus of common European interest. Icebreaking is an important and integrated part of the maritime infrastructure. Efficient winter navigation requires cooperation between the icebreaking authorities in the Baltic Sea countries. The Baltic Sea countries are therefore working together for improved winter navigation through more efficient icebreaking services in the Baltic Sea. Cooperation with the industry is also of utmost importance. You hold in your hand the first joint “Annual Baltic Sea Icebreaking Report”. The report is one attempt from BIM’s side to provide annual reporting on winter navigation and icebreaking beyond the national waters and to provide joint information about the progress and news within the area of winter navigation. This is one step towards the long-term vision of BIM to create a joint Baltic Icebreaking Service. Tallinn, October 2006 Roy Jaan Chairman of BIM 3 Introduction Baltic Icebreaking Management, BIM, is an organisation with members from all Baltic Sea states. BIM is a development of the annual meeting between Baltic Sea States icebreaking authorities which have assembled more than 20 years. The icebreaking authorities around the Baltic Sea decided during the year 2004 that BIM should function all year round and that its strategy should be to develop safe, reliable and efficient winter navigation between the Baltic Sea countries. The overall objective of BIM is to assure a well functioning maritime transport system in the Baltic Sea all year round by enhancing the strategic and operational cooperation between the Baltic Sea countries within the area of assistance to winter navigation. The vision is a joint Baltic Sea icebreaking service. The member countries of BIM are Finland, Russia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Germany, Denmark, Norway and Sweden. Within the EU concept Motorways of the Sea, which is one priority project in the trans- European network, the Baltic Sea countries consider efficient winter navigation to be one priority area for cooperation. Since the beginning of the sixties, there is an agreement at governmental level on cooperation in icebreaking operations in the Baltic Sea between Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Norway. Germany also participates in the icebreaking cooperation, but without an agreement at governmental level. One important task of BIM is to inform stakeholders in the maritime sector and policy makers about winter navigation and icebreaking. There is a need for information about winter navigation and icebreaking that covers the whole Baltic Sea region. Several Baltic Sea countries prepare information about the winter navigation and icebreaking in their respective national waters. There has been a need to coordinate this country-specific information, improve the information and to distribute it to a wider target group. This “Joint Annual Baltic Icebreaking Report” is the first of its kind. The intention is that the report will be prepared on an annual basis. This report aims to give an overview of the winter navigation season 2005/2006 for the Baltic Sea area. National reports can be found on www.baltice.org. The report will also describe organisational changes in the icebreaking authorities or changes in icebreaking resources and provide a progress report of the Baltic Sea Icebreaking cooperation and the development of BIM. 4 Overview of the icebreaking season (2005-2006) and its effect on the maritime transport system in the Baltic Sea region The Baltic Sea ice season of 2005-2006 could be classified as an average one. The maximum ice extent reached 210,000 km² (50% of the Baltic Sea was ice covered). Figure 1. Maximum ice coverage in season 2005/2006. 5 The season started as mild, and the general ice formations occurred at the end of February. March was very cold, and the maximum ice extent occurred on 16 March (Fig. 1). According to statistical information, the ice extension exceeded that of an average winter (Fig. 3). In April there were night frosts, and the ice melting was slow (Fig. 2). In late May the ice disappeared from the northern Bay of Bothnia around the normal time. This season, low temperatures in the southern part of the Baltic Sea created ice also in the German and Polish fairways (Fig 1). There was new ice in the Sound and along the southern coast of Sweden. March was very cold over the whole Baltic Sea area. Monthly air temperature anomalies 2005-06 6,0 . 4,0 2,0 Oulu 0,0 Mariehamn Deg. C Deg. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. Malmö -2,0 -4,0 -6,0 Figure 2. Temperature anomalies in the Bay of Bothnia (Oulu), the Southern Sea of Bothnia (Mariehamn) and the Southwestern Baltic Sea (Malmö). 6 During the last 30 years there have been 8 severer and 21 milder seasons. One way to express how difficult the ice winter was is to measure the maximum ice extension. The maximum ice coverage this year was just above the limit to be classified as a severe winter. But due to mainly weak winds this season, the ice conditions were not very difficult for the maritime traffic. 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Figure 3. Maximum ice coverage in years 1900-2006. Ice extension above the upper line is classified as severe, between the lines normal, and below the lower line mild. The most important factors for winter navigation are ice extension and wind direction/force. The ice conditions can be very difficult when strong wind creates pressure and ridges in the ice field. In conditions when a large number of vessels require towing assistance by icebreakers, long delays occur. Figure 4. Ice ridge builds up against shore. 7 Only vessels with ice class are offered assistance from icebreakers when traffic restrictions are issued. Traffic restrictions are necessary for safe and efficient winter navigation. A vessel must have a strong hull that can withstand strain and stress from the sea ice. Sufficient engine power and ability to navigate independently in broken or light ice is important to avoid long delays. This winter, traffic restrictions were in force also in the Central Baltic. Figure 5. Days of the year when traffic restrictions were in force in the different areas. 8 For safety reasons,